If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

When the NBA released its schedule this summer, I was shocked. The Indiana Pacers were fresh off pushing the Miami Heat to seven games in the Eastern Conference Finals. I've seen series go seven games and not be close. This was as close as you could get. Miami controlled that Game 7, but really, the Pacers were one good quarter away from stealing the Heat's spot and facing San Antonio. Not to mention, they had a bizarre coaching decision (keeping Roy Hibbert out of Game 1) that in part impacted the finish to that game.

This team, which had shown likeable, fun, young stars like Roy Hibbert and Paul George, who had funny press conferences and big highlight reels, who played in a place renown for being a basketball mecca.

They are scheduled to be on non-NBATV national television 10 times ths season. Ten.

I won't go into the dynamics of what other teams are on there more. There are some understandable decisions (Kobe Bryant was a dice roll and the Lakers could roll out Kobe and the Tiny Toons cast -- and they kind of are -- and get ratings), there are some baffling ones. But the bigger point is that Indiana is being wholly ignored, after establishing itself as title contender last season, then improving their roster this summer.

And here's the amazing thing. That decision has actually gotten worse.

The Pacers improved to 6-0 Friday night, coming back from a double-digit deficit against Toronto and holding the Raptors to 33 percent shooting from the second quarter on. They have the second best defensive efficiency (points per possession allowed), the second best net points per possession, the thirteenth best assist ratio, the third best rebound percentage (percentage of available rebounds grabbed), 11th in effective field goal percentage (factoring three-pointers, seventh in true shooting percentage (factoring three pointers and free throws), second in points of turnovers... You getting the picture yet? Wait, there's more! 1st in opponents' fast break points and opponent points in the paint allowed, and are allowing opponents to shoot just 46 percent in the restricted area.

So, yeah, they're pretty good. It's early in the season, but their schedule hasn't been especially soft, either. They look like a monster.

And still, people will sleep on them.

Last season, the talk was about the New York Knicks on account of their (unsustainably) hot start shooting and a wonderful April run. This, despite the Pacers having been a more consistent and better team for the middle and longer part of the season. When they kicked the Knicks down the stairwell in the playoffs, the narrative was more about te Knicks' struggles than Indiana. No one really noticed how tough they had played Miami.

If you're making the case for Indiana, it goes like this:

1. Their defense is dominant, one of the better teams of the past decade, with the ability to protect at the rim and on the perimeter.

2. Their offense is improving, 15th this season in offensive efficiency up from 19th last year. Paul George looks like a significantly improved player from last season... when he won Most Improved Player. Luis Scola and C.J. Watson gives them better offensive balance off the bench and they are shooting more three-pointers and fewer mid-range jumpers. They're also shooting fewer shots at the rim, but an increased shooting percentage is likely leading to fewer points for offensive putbacks. (14.3 second-chance points per game last year, compared to 11.8 this season).

The Pacers are converting inefficient shots to efficient shots, and that's only going to help their offense. They used this same tactic against New York and it was part of why their sluggish offense from last year turned into a monster in the last two rounds.

3. They are one of the best coached teams in the league thanks to Frank Vogel, who balances drive and ease with his players and has managed the team's identity brilliantly.

4. They lack egos. This is where the question of marketability comes in. Would the Pacers be more popular if they had a me-first, isolation-heavy star on their roster? Would they be more noteworthy with more internal drama and in-fighting? Instead, the Pacers always seem positive, go about their business, and do their work.

5. No team hates Miami more. Sure, Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce and blah blah blah. The Pacers hate the Heat. It's been this way for two years. The Pacers knock the Heat around, defend LeBron James as well as Chicago does, and have the offensive weapons to counter. And they take every matchup personally.

Even if the Pacers lose to the Nets Saturday, they'll still have the best mark in the league, still have the best resume of any team, and still have answered most of the questions people had about them. ("Can Paul George get any better?" "How good is Roy Hibbert?" "Can David West maintain?" The answers, in order, are: yes, yes, yes.)

So the Pacers will go along, not being seen by the public despite funny and engaging stars, despite being one of the league's best, despite being the early (and it is extremely early) favorite to knock off Miami, if anyone can. They are the stealth contenders, your Indiana Ninja Pacers.

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

Honestly, I think the "no one pays attention to Indiana" stuff is just click bait. It's predetermined narratives that really don't even have anything to do with us that lets a writer wax...well, just wax really. Lots and lots of media pay attention to us now. We're the new "it" team.

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

Honestly, I think the "no one pays attention to Indiana" stuff is just click bait. It's predetermined narratives that really don't even have anything to do with us that lets a writer wax...well, just wax really. Lots and lots of media pay attention to us now. We're the new "it" team.

Sure, but the article certainly doesn't hurt the chances that casual watchers might go out of their way to watch the team.

The Following User Says Thank You to Heisenberg For This Useful Post:

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

No one pays attention to the Pacers cuz they r a small market Team with a boring offense that does not cater to the casual fan. The only real star that may garnish some attention is PG24 and ( to a certain extent....cuz of his personality and twitter following ) Hibbert....which no one outside of real NBA hardcore fans are aware of. The same could be said about the Grizzlies....they...just like the Pacers...made it all the way to the WCF but got their butts handed to them by the Spurs.

Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

We are on SportsCenter ever day after we play.... we arent getting ignored were just not being pampered, which I dont want to be. I like and want things to stay the same. I'd rather be under the radar.

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to PacerPenguins For This Useful Post:

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

The media attention (this story included) has really picked up recently. Hell, I even watched first take (or whatever Skip Baseless's show is) and they (with Legler) talk about the Pacers positively for like 20 minutes.

PG24: "Don't tell me the sky is the limit when there are footprints on the moon!"

RT @Hoya2aPacer "When I play this game I love. I play to make my teammates better. But I'm a mouther****er on defense."

The article is about the lack of accessible national TV games, not about buzz. Now, maybe the buzz will help get some games next year, but the reality is that unless we beat Miami we'll be back to square one with one of the Big Teams doing something hype-able thatt drives them to a couple dozen games.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

BillS

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

Business first. Problem is that so called sports writers watch the games that are convenient. And don't branch out too much. Thats how you get Roy Hibbert 10th in DPOTY voting.

But how smart is that business decision? The Knicks don't have much of a national following. They have never been one of the league's marquee teams. They have never had a true marquee star. They haven't won a championship in 40 years. They didn't even get to the Conference Finals last year. Outside of the NY metropolitan area, hardly anyone cares about the Knicks. They are getting these games purely because they are a big market team, and that's weak.

The NFL does a superior job of marketing its teams. Sunday Night Football and Monday Night Football are distributed very fairly. Unlike the NBA, the NFL understands that there are more than 5 teams in the league.

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

But how smart is that business decision? The Knicks don't have much of a national following. They have never been one of the league's marquee teams. They have never had a true marquee star. They haven't won a championship in 40 years. They didn't even get to the Conference Finals last year. Outside of the NY metropolitan area, hardly anyone cares about the Knicks. They are getting these games purely because they are a big market team, and that's weak.

The NFL does a superior job of marketing its teams. Sunday Night Football and Monday Night Football are distributed very fairly. Unlike the NBA, the NFL understands that there are more than 5 teams in the league.

But the thing is that the fanbases are different. Football is king. People watch MNF regardless of what teams are playing to a certain extent. People don't watch a basketball game just because its the only one on.

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

The NFL does a superior job of marketing its teams. Sunday Night Football and Monday Night Football are distributed very fairly. Unlike the NBA, the NFL understands that there are more than 5 teams in the league.

Unlike the NBA, in the NFL they play football. It's a different sport and it's necessarily marketed differently. Beer and vodka are both alcohol, why are the commercials so different?

The league could put the Pacers on ABC eighty two times a season and it wouldn't matter, there's a ceiling to the interest this team is gonna create. I love the Pacers but they just don't have a strong narrative that is gonna make people want to watch.

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

But the thing is that the fanbases are different. Football is king. People watch MNF regardless of what teams are playing to a certain extent. People don't watch a basketball game just because its the only one on.

Maybe, but the NBA never really tries anything different, so we really don't know.

I wouldn't be whining if for example, the Knicks had 5 ABC games to our 3. But the 6 to 0 ratio after we completely dismantled the Knicks in the playoffs is just a joke.

I get it to an extent. I understand giving a ton of games to the 90's Bulls, Lakers over the years, and Heat right now. All of those teams feature marquee stars and have been very successful. But the Knicks don't feature a marquee star and they haven't been very successful. They're only getting all of these games because of the size of the market they play in.

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

But the thing is that the fanbases are different. Football is king. People watch MNF regardless of what teams are playing to a certain extent. People don't watch a basketball game just because its the only one on.

If the teams playing are playing based on merit instead of market size maybe more people would? This isn't about comparing fan sizes, it is about maximizing your potential.

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

They may not have a lot of supporters against the NY metropolitan area but they make excellent villains. Several people like to root against New York teams and that's enough to draw decent ratings.

People certainly like to root against the Yankees, but I don't know how much the "root against NY" thing extends beyond them. I would say that most of the country was easily rooting for the Giants in both of their Super Bowls against the Patriots.

The 90's Knicks with their intensity certainly made for good villains, but these current Knicks do not.

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

If the teams playing are playing based on merit instead of market size maybe more people would? This isn't about comparing fan sizes, it is about maximizing your potential.

I don't think it would though. So many factors contribute to MNFs success.

A) They do try to feature all teams but better teams are given more games
B) People do watch because of fantasy football
C) Because how important every game is because of the # of games, if either team is in your teams division/conference you have a vested interest in the result
D) No College football, how often will NBA games have that advantage?
E) ETC

What if someone from a school of business or management school were to ask, How did you do this? How did you get the Pacers turned around? Is there a general approach you've taken that can be summarized?

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

I don't think it would though. So many factors contribute to MNFs success.

A) They do try to feature all teams but better teams are given more games
B) People do watch because of fantasy football
C) Because how important every game is because of the # of games, if either team is in your teams division/conference you have a vested interest in the result
D) No College football, how often will NBA games have that advantage?
E) ETC

There are many reasons why a regular season NBA game will never get equal ratings of a regular season NFL game. Most namely 16 vs 82. Also because it happens once a week on the same day at the same time, while NBA games are kind of random. But none of that matters. It is about trying to replicate NFL ratings, it is just about trying to maximize your potential. The NBAs potential may be less than the NFL, but many think it could be much higher if they did a better job of marketing the game and teams. Part of that is to have your best teams and the biggest match-ups. Just putting in your biggest markets and throwing a bone to some of the better teams in small markets isn't the best way to build the brand of the NBA outside of New Yokr, Chicago, Miami, and LA.

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

Your assuming that ratings and quality of team have a direct correlation.

You are assuming the best ratings nationally is what is best for the league as a whole. Could be showing off your best will build up fan bases in areas not names New York and LA allowing for teams like the Pacers to actually make money. What is better 7 teams making profit or 14? Maybe that extra exposure makes it so that superstars don't feel a need to play in big markets. This could bring about more parity, a more competitive league, and more interesting league. Which would lead to higher ratings overall and more merchandising sales, and more profit.

Re: The "Ninja" Pacers and Why Aren't People Watching Them?

Nothing like arguing for why one of the leagues top 4 teams shouldn't be on national tv....

I wonder what marketing programs tell their students not to advertise one of their best products, and instead focus on some mediocre ones. I bet not many.

Can you imagine making it to the AFC or NFC Title game and not getting a single Sunday Night Football game the next season? It wouldn't happen. These ABC games are basically the Sunday Night Football of the NBA.

Heck, the Spurs made the freaking Finals, yet only have one ABC game.

There are 15 ABC games that involve just 8 franchises: Oklahoma City, New York, Miami, LAL, San Antonio, Chicago, LAC, Houston.

San Antonio and Houston each only have one. The Clipps have two. The rest the games pretty much revolve around the same five teams: OKC, NY, Miami, LAL, and Chicago.

There's such a sickening bias to the same few teams. It's all so boring and predictable. You take the Heat to Game 7 of the Eastern Conference Finals, but you can't even get an ABC game, while a team you bulldozed in the semis gets 6. No stat epitomizes the joke of how the NBA markets its teams more than the Knicks 6 ABC Games/Pacers 0 one. It's just pathetic.